Coronavirus as force majeure event - The impact on contracts


by George Kazoleas, Lawyer LL.M
The rapid spread of coronavirus worldwide has crucial effects in social and economic life. The regularity of transactions has been disrupted and the normal evolution of many aspects of economic and commercial activity has been reversed.
According to the World Health Organization, coronaviruses are a large family of viruses that can cause disease in animals or humans. In humans, several coronaviruses cause respiratory infections, influenza and more serious illnesses such as the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). The most recently discovered coronavirus causes COVID-19.
Coronavirus as force majeure
It depends on the circumstances if the spread of the virus can be regarded as a cause of force majeure that prevents or inhibits the fulfillment of contractual obligations.
The European Commission states that there is force majeure if the incident or its non-fulfillment "is due to circumstances other than those relied upon, indefinable and unforeseeable, the consequences of which could not have been avoided despite all the diligence shown".
Furthermore, in case of an event constituting a reason of force majeure, its effects can last only for a specific period of time, i.e. during the time which is essentially necessary for an administrative authority, demonstrating ordinary care, to put an end to a crisis against its independent will.
The main characteristic of "force majeure" is that a person, in the ordinary course of action, cannot foresee such event, as opposed to a random, sticto sensu, event that can be foreseen. Some typical cases of force majeure events include events such as: war, coup d’ etat, unforeseen governmental prohibitions, sudden severe illnesses (in some cases), and/or "extreme weather conditions".
It is worth mentioning that, the EU Court of Justice has refused, in certain cases, to apply the clause of force majeure, where there were no explicit provisions to that effect and also because the purpose of certain provisions of European law do not allow, in all cases, situations to be taken into account that are characterized by what can be considered a case of force majeure. This applies especially on conditions that must be strictly observed, as failure to comply with them would jeopardize the proper implementation of the relevant clauses.
This underlines the possibility for the parties, under the principle of freedom of contract, to agree clauses of their choice, such as force majeure clauses.
Force majeure clause pertaining to coronavirus in contracts:
The contractual definition of a force majeure event includes a list of events that are not expected at the date of the conclusion of the contract, which are beyond the control of the contractual parties, and these events prevent or delay the affected party from fulfilling its contractual obligations.
Very often, but not always, 'epidemics' can be found in the relevant clauses, and in some cases 'pandemics' as events of force majeure. However, many contracts do not provide for epidemics as an event of force majeure. The wording of such clauses is important in order to cover the case of coronavirus as a force majeure event. If, regardless of the omission of explicitly stating that "epidemic" or "pandemic" constitute force majeure events in relevant clauses, the latter have been formulated in such a way as to state that any event beyond the reasonable control of the contractual parties, constitutes a force majeure event, then coronavirus may also be covered by such clauses.
It should, also, noted that as sufficient time has lapsed since the date that coronavirus emerged (in essence, since December 2019), the contractual parties are now able to foresee the consequences and to include more specific terms in the contracts, based on the known data regarding the virus until the date of signing of the contracts, in order to be able to fulfill their contractual obligations (e.g. extending the time of completion).
The spread of coronavirus results in public/governmental actions, as well as, decisions of private companies which entail bans and restrictions (e.g. traffic bans, cancellations, suspension of public services, etc.). The consequences of these measures have a direct or indirect impact on the execution of commercial contracts. The formulation of precise wording of a force majeure clause in contracts, with specific details provided, will have a positive impact on the execution of such contracts. However, re-examining and redrafting unclear and problematic force majeure clauses in existing contracts would be a clever and reasonable approach, as the spread of coronavirus is in full swing and its consequences in terms of time and impact, are still unknown and unpredictable. (photo: pixabay)
____________________
George Kazoleas is partner lawyer at Dionysiou & Partners LLC, Cyprus
* This article is for information purposes only. For any ad hoc legal advice on the subject of contractual terms of force majeure and any other issues pertaining to contract law, please contact us at: +357 22 272360 or email us at: info@dplawcyprus.com

Comments

Post a Comment

Editorial

Editorial
George Kazoleas, Lawyer

Top Stories

Ombudsman inquiry on Commission President’s text messages is a wake-up call for EU

Image
The European Ombudsman inquiry into the Commission’s handling of a request for text messages between its President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company is a wake-up call for all EU institutions about ensuring accountability in an era of instant messaging. One year after the initial request by a journalist, the Commission has still not clarified whether messages reported to concern major vaccine procurement deals exist and whether the public is entitled to see them. The Ombudsman had asked the Commission, in a finding of maladministration in January, to conduct a more thorough search for the text messages. The Commission’s recent response failed to say whether it had looked directly and correctly for the text messages and if not, why not. While the response recognised that work-related text messages can be EU documents, it reiterated that the Commission’s internal policy is, in effect, not to register text messages. The Ombudsman has closed  the inquiry  and upheld...
Read more

Daily Mail publisher wins case against ‘success fees’ paid to lawyers (ECtHR)

Image
Obligation on publisher of the Daily Mail to pay substantial “success fees" in defamation and breach of privacy cases was excessive. The case Associated Newspapers Limited v. the United Kingdom (application no. 37398/21) concerned the fact that Associated Newspapers Limited the publisher of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday had been obliged to pay extensive costs incurred by claimants who had successfully sued it in privacy and/or defamation proceedings following articles it had published in print or online in 2017 and 2019.  Since one of the claimants had entered into a conditional fee arrangement (CFA) with his legal representative, and both had taken out “after-the-event” (ATE) insurance, Associated Newspapers Limited had been liable not only for their base costs, but also for fee uplifts including the “success fee” in the CFA and for their ATE insurance premiums.  In Chamber judgment (12.11.2024) in the case, the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that t...
Read more

ECtHR elects a new Vice-President of the Court and two new Section Presidents

Image
The European Court of Human Rights has elected on 23.9.2024 a new Vice-President of the Court – Judge Ivana Jelić (elected in respect of Montenegro). She will take up her duties on 1 November 2024.  The Court has also elected at the same date two new Section Presidents – Judges Lado Chanturia (elected in respect of Georgia) and Ioannis Ktistakis (elected in respect of Greece). They will also take up their duties on 1 November 2024. Ivana Jelić was born on 17 March 1975 in Podgorica, Montenegro and was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 12 July 2018. Lado Chanturia was born on 14 April 1963 in Tsalenjikha, Georgia, was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 8 January 2018 and is Vice-President of Section since 18 May 2023. Ioannis Ktistakis was born on 3 January 1971 in Thebes, Greece and was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 8 March 2021. (source/photo: echr.coe.int) Read more here
Read more

Intellectual property: the figurative sign consisting of the phrase ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ in Russian and English cannot be registered as an EU trade mark

Image
In its Judgment in Case T-82/24 (Administration of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine v EUIPO) (RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F**K YOURSELF) the General Court ruled that the figurative sign consisting of the phrase ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ in Russian and English cannot be registered as an EU trade mark. That phrase, which has become a symbol of Ukraine’s fight against Russian aggression, is not perceived as an indication of a commercial origin.  The Administration of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine (Kyiv, Ukraine) requests the General Court of the European Union to annul the decision of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 1 st December 2023, which refused registration of the following figurative sign as an EU trade mark: ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ That mark is a war cry uttered by the Ukrainian border guard on Snake Island on 24th February 2022, the first day of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine. Registration was sou...
Read more

The banks Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse participated in a cartel in the sector for suprasovereign bonds, sovereign bonds and public agency bonds denominated in US dollars

Image
According to the Judgment of the General Court in Cases T-386/21 (Crédit agricole and Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v Commission) and T-406/21 (UBS Group and Credit Suisse Securities (Europe) v Commission), the banks Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse participated in a cartel in the sector for suprasovereign bonds, sovereign bonds and public agency bonds denominated in US dollars (‘SSA Bonds’).  The General Court of the European Union confirms the Commission’s finding of an infringement and maintains the amount of the fines imposed in 2021. In 2018, the European Commission initiated proceedings for infringement of the competition rules involving Deutsche Bank, Bank of America, Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse (now UBS Group [1] ).  In 2021, the Commission found that those banks had entered into an agreement on the secondary market for suprasovereign, sovereign and agency bonds denominated in dollars (SSA bonds). According to the Commission, traders employed by ...
Read more

European Ombudsman asks Commission to publish details of its handling of senior staff move to law firm

Image
The European Ombudsman has asked the European Commission to publish details about how it has handled the planned move by a former director in its competition department to the Brussels office of a US corporate law firm as a partner. Any restrictions that have been placed on the activities of the former director to mitigate potential conflicts of interest should be made public without delay, said the Ombudsman. She noted that public information about the move came from the law firm and gives the impression that the Commission has allowed a senior official to work for a company that anticipates major benefits from their inside knowledge.  The Ombudsman also noted that the Commission declined to give details about the individual’s professional experience despite the fact that the law firm itself has put out a press release detailing it. The Ombudsman has previously criticised a tendency in the EU administration to underestimate the potential negative effects of staff moves to th...
Read more

A national court is not required to apply a decision of its constitutional court that infringes EU law (ECJ)

Image
In its Judgment of 26.9.2024 in Case C-792/22 (Energotehnica) the Court of Justice ruled as regards the right to an effective remedy that a national court is not required to apply a decision of its constitutional court that infringes EU law. In such a case, the national court may not be penalised.  Following the death of an electrician by electrocution during a maintenance operation, an administrative procedure was initiated against his employer. At the same time, criminal proceedings for negligence and manslaughter were initiated against the supervisor. The victim’s next of kin also became civil parties to the criminal proceedings.  The administrative court hearing the dispute concluded that the present case did not involve an ‘accident at work’. It annulled the administrative penalties imposed on the employer. According to national legislation, as interpreted by the Romanian Constitutional Court, that administrative decision prevents the criminal court from reconsidering whe...
Read more